As a veteran of wars in the Middle East, and a Tennessee voter, I find this entire situation from our Republican Legislators to be a very large embarrassment.
It's offensive and stupid.
It achieves nothing. It prevents nothing. It only serves to massage their personal pride.
It's obvious these people do not know the first thing about these matters of religion; or, just how idiotic they look by trying to force their sad ideas and misconceptions upon us all. We needn't get into the details of how wrong these legislators are: there's nothing right about what they are doing. Please encourage all lawmakers to stop this nonsense immediately.
How about listing the tax breaks we already provided to allow the city to create some of these parking lots? And, what about the over $250,000 spent on robo-meters, monitored by CARTA? So far, these reprehensible parking fees have long squelched small business on the North Shore, after we provided for the creation of those parking lots.
It's the same old song and dance we get from politico liars. They beg for our help in tax breaks or initiatives to construct an object. They'll say they need our help to fund the whole thing. We then provide them with that funding. They respond by billing us for using the facility we paid for.
Let us use the facilities we've paid for. Stop billing us twice with these habitual lies and sales ploys.
Support free parking in Chattanooga in taxpayer-provided and supported parking lots.
The story doesn't tell us what the guilty and innocent verdicts were for which charges. It's significant. Please revise. Thanks.
By allowing private companies to profit from, but not be publicly accountable for, the issuing of punitive citations with fines, our legislators overstepped their bounds. It's not prudent to allow private companies to profit from penalizing people whose rights begin with a presumption of innocence. Automating the process, by using cameras and computers, instead of using people to make decisions, only further limits liability for the profiteers; it's likely that those limitations will result in errors that would then require people to prove or beg for a dismissal of charges.
We should never place our people in a position where they have to beg for their rights from a computer's decision.
We need to keep people in the decision making process as regulators. That's the policing in "Police." Trying to replace police officers with computers is not an acceptable substitute for preferred law enforcement practices. Using technology as a tool is okay; but, that's not what Tennessee lawmakers did when they permitted the automated issuing of traffic tickets by private companies who used robotic detection systems and automated citation issue.
In effect, Tennessee lawmakers allowed computers to penalize people for money. This is totally unacceptable. We expect thinking and accountable people to be the decision makers in government.
We also expect a refund.
There are some difficult questions at hand as to how it is we have allowed a profiteering company to gain access to confidential information about drivers, as the company chose to detect that driver's identity. What controls have been put in place to protect the privacy of innocent people from marketing efforts not related to issuing a traffic ticket? With no responsible people in the decision making process, we would have little recourse to stop unethical business practices which might exploit our citizens. Given the amoral and selfish conduct of large companies in the past five years, we have not seen sufficient ethical conduct as to believe that companies are trustworthy custodians of private information. At least with government, we have an opportunity to respond as The Public.
As difficult as the job may be, we need to continue to gain the benefit and the responsibility of support from the police by thinking people.
Trying to replace police officers with a computer for a private businessman's profit was a poor idea. It should have been squelched immediately. We're shocked to see that it has been allowed to continue for this long.
Not only should the program be stopped, but these inappropriately collected fines should be returned to the people who were victimized by this obviously unjust law.
100% total refund, with interest, is what's expected.
Pay back the robo-ticket money. Be sure to include a public apology for inconvenience and poor judgment. Thanks.
Notice how the Littlefield budget shortfall is similar to the number of millions in tax dollar giveaways from Republicans in the area this past year. Failure to collect taxes on large businesses may promote cronyism and bring in RNC ad dollars to politicians who fail to stand up for their communities, but in both the long and short runs, those practices hurt us all. Another buddy-buddy deal from career politicos motivated by excessive self-interest created this problem.
No doubt, we'll have another Republican politician suggest we give away another six million dollars to his friends later on this week.
Or, maybe let his self-appointed neighbor on the County Commission hold onto six million for another quarter instead of "wasting" the money on schoolchildren. They could then raffle off the six million among their friends.
Just disgusting. Habitual failures to make practical decisions about equity. Notice that last year's budget reports show a $10 million dollar change in the reported figures, due to definition massaging. This means that the shortfall is actually $10 million dollars greater than reported above. Mayor Littlefield's fictional definitions of cost are not acceptable to taxpayers.
Collect the taxes on these large businesses. Remove Republicans and their sweetheart, buddy-buddy deals that promote selfish payoffs at our expense. We, the average citizen, will have to make up for these losses as Mayor Littlefield and his like give money away to their friends.
Vote to remove Mayor Littlefield and his cronies from office as soon as lawfully possible. Keep them out. And fix the @#$%^ budget.
Insist on observable, equity-oriented accounting. Reject these Bush-era, lying, debtor-economy promoting schemes of picking fictional definitions of value.
Remove Ron as soon as possible. Have someone who is trustworthy present and audit any and all budget proposals.
The First Amendment will support religious freedom throughout the US. Meanwhile, we should take care not to side or appear to side with hatred and fear. We should continue to support our Muslim communities.
As a veteran of both the Persian Gulf and Iraq Wars, it pains me to see many patriotic citizens advocating an anti-Islam agenda toward their fellow American citizens. The reality is that Islam is as diverse as Christianity in the specifics of its practice. We need only look to our view of Christianity and see the wars in Ireland to detect our hypocrisy towards the Muslims on this matter. We do not, for example, ridicule Catholics and Anglican Protestants as insane extremists. Instead, we offer the same regard for our Christian citizens of those religions as we do for citizens of all other religions.
It does not help, but rather hurt, our goals of promoting Enlightenment ideals both at home and abroad when we villify people based on the name of the description of their religion. It's just not rational or prudent to believe that people of one descriptive label are bad or evil.
It seems to me that this test is actually designed to accommodate a fatter Army. They have reduced the endurance requirements for the tests. For example, anyone who has seen a two minute push-up test knows that the poorest performers cannot do push-ups for two minutes at all. They will fail the test, by quitting, after a minute. By reducing that time requirement, it's possible to statistically boost passing scores.
Alternative events have long been available as part of PT testing; they're usually just as hard, if not harder, than the straight push-up, sit-up and run tests.
Notice also that the older test, like the 40-round marksmanship test, is the absolute cheapest test that can be administered that will still yield an answer. That's part of the real problem: failure to pay for adequate training and testing. Overall, armies are armies because they are there exclusively to field a very large force. That's what an army does. Training and testing and maintaining that very large force is expensive. Recurring expenses, like routine testing and training for physical fitness and marksmanship, have long been sore spots on the budget.
Removing the situps requirement is the next step, after admitting more obese and overweight recruits into the Army. The reality is that Solidering is a hard labor job, with repetitive motion work. Digging, crawling, lifting, marching long distances while carrying heavy loads: these are the laborer's roots in military service.
Trying to adjust the test to generate more passing results to make recruiting and sustaining easier does not make the work of serving in a war easier. We should note that our forces have been long over-deployed and, in the past, cheaply supported. We are still facing those problems. Making the test easier for the overall statistics reports is not an acceptable answer.
Being able to prove citizenship at a traffic stop or while walking down the street on an ordinary day would be much more difficult than being able to prove citizenship at the pleasure of investigators.
Being able to prove citizenship when someone committing fraud has stolen your identity could be downright troublesome.
Being able to prove citizenship without the cooperation of a government agency, some of whom may not have a motive to help you, might be practically impossible.
Government documents are key items of evidence in citizenship claims. Without them, we can really only rely on witnesses to a birth and raising to adulthood of a child. Those same governments might well be the agencies actively prosecuting someone whose citizenship is in question.
Assuming that we can all easily prove citizenship, on our own, when others challenge it shows just how little we've thought through this process. Compare the concept of proving citizenship to the idea of proving other observable facts about a birth besides location. Hundreds of millions of American citizens throughout history have had no reasonable, provable information about the specific circumstances of their birth, throughout history.
I think the question is so simplistic as to lead us to some unrealistic conclusions about our thoughts on the security and reliability of proving citizenship.
Women are such poor judges of what makes them look good. Basic health and hygiene are often more than enough. These monster shoes don't cut it. Insane diets, makeup that sucks their faces dry, idiotic cosmetic surgery: all unnecessary. These shoes aren't much different.
The only thing that's going to slim them up is diet and exercise. Military standards for female weight are reasonable. Between five and six feet in height, women who are healthy should weigh in between a hundred and 180 pounds, depending on age and height specifics. Insane weight loss and disguise plans, like these shoes, aren't a reasonable substitute for basic health.
I saw some woman getting in a car the other day in one of these chunky wedge heel things, pictured above. All I could think was, How is that idiot going to drive? It looked like it would sprain an ankle to operate a car.
Just nuts. Go jogging. Go swimming. Get some sun. Do some kind of activity other than being cooped up in the death box of a cubicle or air conditioned home 24 hours a day.
While it's nice when women dress up and look nice, some of this stuff is just nuts. Health looks better than theatrical costume shoes. Being smart and nice is way sexier.
I was going to help you with that avatar, but since I disagree with your comments above, I'm going to let you languish in frustration.